[ULPIANUS libro septuagensimo quinto ad edictum. ] §44.2.7.prSi quis, cum totum petisset, partem petat, exceptio rei iudicatae nocet, nam pars in toto est: eadem enim res accipitur et si pars petatur eius, quod totum petitum est.
[ULPIANUS libro septuagensimo quinto ad edictum.] If someone, having claimed the whole, claims a part, the exception of res judicata is prejudicial, for the part is in the whole; for it is accepted as the same matter even if a part is claimed of that of which the whole was claimed.
nec interest, utrum in corpore hoc quaeratur an in quantitate uel in iure.
And it does not matter whether this is asked of a physical object, or of quantity, or of a right.
proinde si quis fundum petierit, deinde partem petat uel pro diuiso uel pro indiuiso, dicendum erit exceptionem obstare.
Therefore, if someone has claimed a land, and then claims a part either as divided or as undivided, it must be said that the exception stands in the way.
proinde et si proponas mihi certum locum me petere ex eo fundo, quem peti, obstabit exceptio.
Therefore also, if you propose to me that I claim a certain place out of that land which I claimed, the exception will stand in the way.
idem erit probandum et si duo corpora fuerint petita, mox alterutrum corpus petatur: nam nocebit exceptio.
The same must be approved also if two physical objects have been claimed, and soon after one or the other object is claimed; for the exception will be prejudicial.
item si quis fundum petierit, mox arbores excisas ex eo fundo petat, aut insulam petierit, deinde aream petat, uel tigna uel lapides petat: item si nauem petiero, postea singulas tabulas uindicem:
Likewise if someone has claimed a land, and soon after claims trees cut down from that land; or has claimed a building, and then claims the plot of land, or claims the beams or the stones; likewise if I have claimed a ship, and afterwards claim the individual planks.
§44.2.7.1si ancillam praegnatem petiero et post litem contestatam conceperit et pepererit, mox partum eius petam: utrum idem petere uideor an aliud, magnae quaestionis est.
If I have claimed a pregnant female slave, and after the joinder of issue she conceives and gives birth, and soon after I claim her offspring: whether I seem to claim the same thing or another, is a question of great debate.
et quidem ita definiri potest totiens eandem rem agi, quotiens apud iudicem posteriorem id quaeritur, quod apud priorem quaesitum est.
And indeed it can be defined in this way: that the same matter is brought to trial as often as that is questioned before the later judge which was questioned before the prior judge.
§44.2.7.2In his igitur fere omnibus exceptio nocet: sed in cementis et tignis diuersum est: nam is, qui insulam petit, si cementa uel tigna uel quid aliud suum petat, in ea condicione est, ut uideatur aliud petere: etenim cuius insula est, non utique et cementa sunt: denique ea, quae iuncta sunt aedibus alienis, separata dominus uindicare potest.
In nearly all of these cases, therefore, the exception is prejudicial; but in the case of stones and beams, it is different. For he who claims a building, if he claims stones or beams or anything else of his own, is in such a condition that he seems to claim another thing. For indeed, he whose the building is, does not necessarily also own the stones. Finally, those things which are joined to another's buildings, the owner can claim once they are separated.
§44.2.7.3De fructibus eadem quaestio est et de partu: haec enim nondum erant in rebus humanis, sed ex ea re sunt, quae petita est: magisque est, ut ista exceptio non noceat.
Concerning fruits, there is the same question as about the offspring; for these were not yet in the world, but they are from that thing which was claimed; and it is more likely that this exception does not prejudice.
plane si in restitutionem uel fructus uel etiam partus uenerunt aestimatique sunt, consequens erit dicere exceptionem obiciendam.
Clearly, if either the fruits or even the offspring entered into the restitution and were valued, it will follow to say that the exception is to be opposed.
§44.2.7.4Et generaliter, ut Iulianus definit, exceptio rei iudicatae obstat, quotiens inter easdem personas eadem quaestio reuocatur uel alio genere iudicii.
And generally, as Julianus defines, the exception of res judicata stands in the way as often as between the same persons the same question is brought back, even in another kind of trial.
et ideo si hereditate petita singulas res petat uel singulis rebus petitis hereditatem petat, exceptione summouebitur.
And therefore if, having claimed an inheritance, someone claims individual things, or, having claimed individual things, claims the inheritance, they will be removed by the exception.
§44.2.7.5Idem erit probandum et si quis debitum petierit a debitore hereditario, deinde hereditatem petat, uel contra si ante hereditatem petierit et postea debitum petat: nam et hic obstabit exceptio: nam cum hereditatem peto, et corpora et actiones omnes, quae in hereditate sunt, uidentur in petitionem deduci.
The same must be approved also if someone has claimed a debt from a debtor of the inheritance, and then claims the inheritance, or on the contrary, if he claimed the inheritance beforehand and afterwards claims the debt; for here too the exception will stand in the way; for when I claim an inheritance, both the physical objects and all actions which are in the inheritance seem to be brought into the claim.